IMPORTANT POINT
Assessment of compensation cannot be done with mathematical precision – Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 also provides for assessment of just and fair compensation.

JUDGMENT :

RAJESH BINDAL, J.

1. Aggrieved against the judgment¹ [Judgment dated 04.04.2019] of the High Court² [Madras High Court, Bench at Madurai] vide which the compensation awarded to the appellants (claimants) by the Tribunal³ [Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Tirunelveli] was reduced, the present appeal has been preferred.

2. Briefly, the facts are that Ravisankar, aged 52 years, met with an accident on 09.12.2012, at about 8.30 P.M. while driving TVS Starcity bearing registration No. TN-72-AV-0927, which was insured with respondent No. 1-Insurance Company. FIR No. 442 dated 10.12.2012 was registered at Police Station Kalakkaadu, District Tirunelveli. A claim petition⁴ [M.C.O.P. No. 281 of 2013] was filed by the dependants of the deceased claiming compensation of Rs. 1,00,00,000/-. It was pleaded that the deceased was doing multiple activities. Besides being an agriculturist growing bananas, coconuts and paddy, he was also running a dairy farm and was a Government contractor. He was the sole bread earner of the family, who left behind his old mother, wife, daughter and son, who are the appellants before this Court.

3. The accident and the liability of the Insurance Company as such are not in dispute.

4. The only dispute raised in the present appeal is regarding the quantum of compensation to which the appellants are entitled to.

5. The Tribunal, after considering the evidence led by the parties, opined that the income of the deceased was Rs. 50,000/- per month. Applying a cut of 1/4th for his personal expenses and adding 10% for future prospects, assessed total compensation towards loss of income at Rs. 51,04,550/-. Besides that, Rs. 15,000/- were awarded towards loss of estate, Rs. 40,000/- towards loss of consortium and Rs. 15,000/- for funeral expenses. The total amount of compensation assessed by the Tribunal was Rs. 51,64,550/-⁵ [There seems to be some error in the calculation]. Interest @ 8% per annum was also awarded.

6. Aggrieved against the aforesaid award of the Tribunal, the Insurance Company preferred an appeal before the High Court. The main issue raised was regarding the income of the deceased. Accepting the contentions raised by the Insurance Company, the High Court reduced the income of the deceased from Rs. 50,000/- to Rs. 20,000/- per month. After adding 10% towards future prospects, application of 1/4th cut on account of personal expenses and after applying a multiplier of 11, the loss of income was assessed at Rs. 21,78,000/-. Adding a sum of Rs. 70,000/- under the conventional heads, compensation of Rs. 22,48,000/- was awarded. The interest awarded by the Tribunal was not disturbed.

7. Learned counsel for the appellants submitted that the High Court had gone wrong in reducing the amount of income of the deceased from Rs. 50,000/- to Rs. 20,000/- per month. There is ample evidence on record to show that whatever was assessed by the Tribunal was just and fair. The deceased had been supplying milk and coconuts to Donavoor Santhosha Vidhayalaya School, from which he had received a sum of Rs. 8,52,447/- during the period from 20.09.2011 to 28.11.2012 (14 months). He was also growing paddy on his land from which receipt claimed was Rs. 7,29,900/-. He also received Rs. 16,36,398/- from sale of bananas grown on the land owned by him. As he was also working as a Government contractor, his annual income therefrom was Rs. 6,00,000/-. The Tribunal had already taken a very conservative view of the matter and assessed the income at Rs. 50,000/- per month. Though the amount assessed by the Tribunal was not reasonable, still the appellants did not challenge the same any further. However, the Insurance Company, with a view to rubbing salt on the wounds, challenged the reasonable compensation awarded by the Tribunal. Sole earning member of the family had died leaving behind four dependants. Value of the life cannot be assessed but whatever meagre amount the Tribunal awarded, the appellants felt satisfied. The prayer is for set